As things stand now, however, negotiating with Iran and Syria over the future of Iraq is about as promising a strategy for preventing more bloodshed as negotiating with Adolf Hitler over the future of Czechoslovakia was in 1938. There were eminent "realists" then too, many of whom were gung-ho for cutting a deal with the Fuehrer. As Neville Chamberlain set off on the diplomatic mission that would culminate in Munich, William Shirer recorded in "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," Britain's poet laureate, John Masefield, composed a paean in his honor . When the negotiations were done and Czechoslovakia had been dismembered, the prime minister was hailed as a national hero. The Nobel Committee received not one, not two, but 10 nominations proposing Chamberlain for the 1939 peace prize.
Shortly after 9/11, President Bush famously declared that every nation "now has a decision to make: Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." At every step of the way, Iran and Syria have unambiguously been with the terrorists.
No regimes on earth have more to gain from an American defeat in Iraq than the theocracy in Iran and the Assad dictatorship in Syria. They have every incentive to aggravate the Iraqi turmoil that has so many Americans clamoring for withdrawal. "There is no evidence to support the assumption that Iran and Syria want a stable Iraq," writes Middle East Quarterly editor Michael Rubin, whose experience in the region runs deep. "Rather, all their actions show a desire to stymie the United States and destabilize their neighbor. More dangerous still . . . is the naive assumption that making concessions to terrorism or forcing others to do so brings peace rather than war."
The war against radical Islam, of which Iraq is but one front, cannot be won so long as regimes like those in Tehran and Damascus remain in power. They are as much our enemies today as the Nazi Reich was our enemy in an earlier era. Imploring Assad and Ahmadinejad for help in Iraq can only intensify the whiff of American retreat that is already in the air. The word for that isn't realism. It's surrender.
Posted by: DanNY ||
12/07/2006 06:54 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
At the visitor center have the now unclassified message traffic from the Japanese west coast consulates on display reporting the successful recruiting of locals. Show the 1941 concentration of all of America's military aircraft production around the LA and Seattle area. Then post the wartime findings of the Supreme Court of the United States on the issue concerning the right of the government to act. We want the 'whole' truth don't we?
#2
If I remember my history correctly Italians and Germans were also under threat of internment if they didn't move into the US interior. Many moved or enlisted and avoided the internment problem associated with the Japanese.
And then there is the Japanese-American Go For Broke boys. Heros one and all. I'm amazed Hollywood hasn't remade the movie about them.
#3
Not worth remembering, apparently: Japanese mass rape-camps, Japanese bubonic plague attacks on China, Japanese babies-on-bayonet games in Nanjing, Japanese rape of nurses and patients at Hong Kong's central hospital, Japanese death marches, Japanese cannibalism of downed USAF pilots (including very nearly President GHW Bush), Japanese sexual-medical experimentation on Russian prisoners of war, etc. etc. etc.
#4
Was the decision of interning Japense-Americans justified yes, yes and yes
We have to remember that for instance, the outnumbered American fleet was able to crush the Japense at Midway only because the Japanese didn't knew the Ameicans were waiting for them. In fact Yamamoto's plan wasn't absurd but based on false premises: he had set submarines and seaplanes for watching American carriers but there were American ships watching the island who had been assigned as staging ground for the seaplanes so they wern't able to operate, for the submarines, when they arrived in front of the American ports the carriers had alrady sailed away. That is why the Japanse fleet was sccattered over thousands of miles with the battleships faaaar way from teh carriers and unable to use their Flak in their defence: because Yamamoto thought American carriers were still at Pearl Harbor. Now imagine that one, only one Japanese had been able tp warn his compatriots about the departure of the American carriers. The Japanse flet would have concentrated sdo the Dauntlesses who surprised and sunk four Japanese carriers would have had to meet the battleship's falk, would have failed and Midway would have been lost. End result would have been tens of thousands more Americans killed: not merely those of Hornet, Enetrprise and Yorktown but also those who would have died regaining the grouns seized by the Japanese after Americans' defeat.
You can discuss the conditionbs of internement of Japanse and Japanses Americans (BTW, infintely better than thnose of wresternbers who happenned to be in Japan or in lands she conqueered befi before Midway), but not about the de cison of interning them. Also if before teh war Japanese Americans had made it clear they were not Japanse but Americans: people who really meant what they were saying when they took the Oath of Citizenship "I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen" then there would have been no need to intern them or at least they would have received better treatment.
#5
It's so easy to look back on any volatile part of history w/21st century eyes and a monday morning qb mentality. It's much harder to make the unpopular decision and do what's right for the country. Though I might get flamed for this - I don't have a problem w/what FDR did. He did what he had to for that period of time. Just like Lincoln 80 yrs prior.
A little piece of history worth noting methinks, pls take it fwiw: During WWII, at the same time FDR ordered the interment camps, several S.American countries had some significant Japanese immigrant populations. The history mentions that those countries shipping lanes took a bigger hit from Jap subs during the war than ever the Americans did, and there were more than a few sabotage operations carried out within their countries. There were no internment camps in S.America for newly arrived Japanese. Experts tend to agree that the local Japanese residents were spying on Brazilian and other S.American countries and relaying said info to Japanese imperial agents. I'd have to google for more details, but I remember some of this off the top of my head from an old article in some WWII mag. I thought it was interesting.
#6
I suggest we load three carriers with liberals and we send them for a reenactment of Midway except that this time thanks to a Japanese informant the Japanese know the Americans have sailed.
#7
The internment was right. So was using the atomic bomb on Japan. The Japs didn't fight like civilized Western countries and made no bones about it, therefore they had no claim to be treated like a civilized Western country. The thrice-damned idiots who keep spouting this PC nonsense deserve a year in a WWII Japanese-run prison camp like Changi. Once having seen and experienced a REAL prison camp, if they survived (and many wouldn't), I haven't the slightest doubt but that they'd emerge with a diametrically different outlook.
Posted by: mac ||
12/07/2006 17:27 Comments ||
Top||
In 142 stark pages, the Iraq Study Group report makes an impassioned plea for bipartisan consensus on the most divisive foreign policy issue of this generation. Without President Bush, that cannot happen.
The commissioners gave a nod to Mr. Bush, adopting his language in accepting the goal of an Iraq that can govern itself, sustain itself and defend itself. But the administrations talk of Iraq as a beacon of democracy in the Middle East is absent, as is any talk of victory.
Instead, the report confronts the president with a powerful argument that his policy in Iraq is not working and that he must move toward disengagement. For Mr. Bush to embrace the study groups blueprint would mean accepting its implicit criticism of his democracy agenda, reversing course in Iraq and throughout the Middle East and meeting Democrats more than halfway.
Continued on Page 49
Being dissed right out of the gate by the NYT. Yep, this puppy's DOA.
The military recommendations issued yesterday by the Iraq Study Group are based more on hope than history and run counter to assessments made by some of its own military advisers. Ever since the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the United States has struggled in vain to tamp down the violence in Iraq and to build up the capacity of Iraqs security forces. Now the study group is positing that the United States can accomplish in little more than one year what it has failed to carry out in three.
In essence, the study group is projecting that a rapid infusion of American military trainers will so improve the Iraqi security forces that virtually all of the American combat brigades may be withdrawn by the early part of 2008. By the first quarter of 2008, subject to unexpected developments in the security situation on the ground, all combat brigades not necessary for force protection could be out of Iraq, the study group says.
Jack Keane, the retired Army chief of staff who served on the groups panel of military advisers, described that goal as entirely impractical. Based on where we are now we cant get there, General Keane said in an interview, adding that the reports conclusions say more about the absence of political will in Washington than the harsh realities in Iraq.
Continued on Page 49
#1
Once the Sunni-Shia sectarianism is won by one side, any anti-US/Western elements will turn next agz the US-suppor Government. Just as US Lefties are describing Communism-Socialism in Amer AS ANYTHING BUT. SO ALSO IS "RETREAT/DEFEAT" NOT BEING CALLED SAME BY AMER's OWN LEADERS. Whom is going to believe, even amongst world Islam, that "Training Standards-Criterions" will be maintained in the absence of US-led nation building + likely on-going, pervasive Sectarianism including agz the US-led authorities.
GET REAL.
HT Jihad Watch. Many interesting, needed, basic fact about mainstream islam mentioned here
By Bat Yeor
With the passing of time, hidden challenges, which for a long time had been growing unnoticed and unaddressed, can suddenly emerge into the full-blown light of current events with a force which seems quite overwhelming. Today the Western world, or Judeo-Christian civilization, shaken by jihadist terror, is being rudely awakened to theological realities blurred for decades. From clashes of civilizations to the jihad that is declaring to the planet its genocidal intentions, rational discourse concerning faith is becoming increasingly fraught.
It is within this tumult and confusion that Mark Durie, an Anglican minister, has written Revelation? Do We Worship the Same God?, in which he raises a couple of fundamental questions: Who is God? Is God Allah? Do Christians and Muslims worship the same God?
To answer these questions, he analyzes Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and God in Christianity and Islam. The reader is given a concise representation of Muslim and Christian arguments. Such an endeavor needs both solid scholarship and theological training. Mark Durie possesses both, being a theologian and a graduate in the language and culture of the Acehnese, a Muslim people from the north of Sumatra in Indonesia. In addition, the subjects he addresses, in the current context, request much intellectual integrity and courage.
But how to know the identity of God in the Koran and in the Bible? The author stresses that this profound and deep question requires engaging with the very essence of Gods identity. With perspicacity and great objectivity, Durie delineates the diverse aspects of his investigations, but he warns that his book should be seen only as guidance, and not the last word.
Duries questioning grows from the Korans statement that Jesus is a Muslim prophet, named Isa a prophet whose birth, life, teaching, and death are found to be totally at odds with the testimony of the Gospels and with Biblical theology. The Koran which for Muslims is the literal word of Allah that cannot be doubted affirms that Muhammads prophetic message is exactly the same as that expressed by the Torah and the Gospels. Since there are many contradictions between the Koran and the Bible, Muslim orthodoxy considers the scriptures of Judaism and Christianity as falsifications of the primal and unique Islamic revelation. It is this accusation that provided the doctrinal justification for the discriminatory legal status of Jews and Christians living under Islam.
In the first section, the author provides information about and reflections upon the Muslim Jesus (Isa). He stresses as fundamental the Korans teaching that Islam is the first, primordial religion, preceding Judaism and Christianity, which are dismissed as invalid traditions, being falsified versions of Islam. Because Christianity and Judaism are thought to be a corruption of the pure message of Islam, anything true in these religions comes from their Islamic roots. Consequently, to obey their true religion, Jews and Christians should revert to Islam and accept the prophethood of Muhammad. That's why muslims don't speak of conversion TO islam (or rather into), but of conversion BACK INTO islam.
This implies, writes Durie, that anyone who opposes Muhammad is not a true Christian, nor a true Jew. Seen in this light, the Koranic verses sympathetic to Jews and Christians refer to those who will see the light and find it to be Islam. If Islam recognizes only itself in Judaism and Christianity, one can wonder whether this replacement theology is not the negation of the very principle of recognition of other religions.
Many Christians profess that Christianity is closer to Islam than to Judaism, because of a common reverence of Jesus/Isa and his mother Mary. They will be astonished to learn from Durie that according to hadiths acts and sayings attributed to Muhammad, and endowed with theological and legislative authority Isa, the Muslim Jesus, will be the ultimate destroyer of Christianity. IIRC, He will return as a servant of the mahdi, wield the very own sword of old mo', destroy all crosses (IE abolish Christianity), kill all pigs, and abolish jyzia (by spreading islam all over the world).
For an interesting eschatological view, see : Will Islam Be Our Future A Study of Biblical and Islamic Eschatology
Durie examines the characters of Jesus and Isa, separated by six centuries; he compares their name and biographies and explains the differing understandings of the prophecy in the Bible and the Koran. While Christianity accepts Jewish Scriptures as the foundation of their belief and practice, and as an integral part of Christian ministry, read in churches around the world, Muslims disregard the Bible. They claim that it is Islam that is the common heritage of Jews, Christians, and Muslims, and that Jews and Christians should work to recover this heritage. Durie comments that, in this process, the Islamization of Jesus and the Hebrew patriarchs and prophets destroys both Christianity and Judaism. But not only. Alexander the Great was muslim, for example, no, really.
The author analyses with great clarity and depth the fundamental principles of the two religions and, in a powerful chapter that raises essential questions, he discusses the concept of Abrahamic Faith that has become so fashionable today as a framework for dialogue. This definition, he points out, originates from the Koranic statement that Abraham was a Muslim prophet and from Islams core doctrine that Islam was the one revelation given to humanity by Allah through the Biblical figures and through Jesus. For Durie, the many Abrahamic Faith conferences throughout the world point to the Islamization of Christian understandings of interfaith dialogue.
Btw, the father of the "abrahamic religions" oeucumenical stuff was Louis Massignon, a french catholic, and also an homosexual fascinated by the virility of islam and its follower (kinda like Laurence of arabia, I guess).
How should Christians respond to this claim which is a fundamental point of Muslim doctrine? Durie develops several arguments based on a rational analysis of history and the texts.
In his conclusion, Durie writes that profound contrasts exist in Islam and Christianity in their understanding of the identity of God. These have far-reaching implications, affecting attitudes, ethics, and politics. The clarification of misunderstandings and false assumptions, masterly exposed by Durie, is a condition to open the way for more constructive dialogue.
Duries book could not have been more timely. He offers a well-balanced analysis, acknowledging the important similarities of the two faiths, without ever misrepresenting the real disagreements or ignoring the hard issues. In this time of globalization, when crucial challenges are emerging for the Wests post-Christian societies, Duries reflections provide essential and fundamental guidance that will enable Christians to engage in a dialogue based on truth.
This is all the more urgent now that the cultural jihad in the West is preventing the free expression of thought and belief, and is subverting the whole ethical foundation of Judeo-Christianity. A major threat to Europe's identity, abetted by its Enlightened Elites.
Bat Yeor is the author of studies on the conditions of Jews and Christians in the context of the jihad ideology and the sharia law. Recent books include: Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide and Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, both at Fairleigh Dickinson University Press.
In the broad details, there are striking similarities between the communist takeover in Czechoslovakia in 1948 and what is occurring in Lebanon today; between the "coup of Prague" and the "coup of Beirut," which Hizbullah and its comrades are presently sweating to implement.
As in Lebanon, the Czechoslovak communists benefited from a Cabinet crisis to kick off massive street protests. They controlled the government and the security ministries, and chose to act because they were expecting to lose ground in upcoming parliamentary elections. The communists had to strike quickly at a time when their external patron, the Soviet Union, was entering into a confrontation with the West. Indeed, Moscow had forced the Czech government to reverse its initial acceptance of Western aid under the Marshall Plan, fearing this would take Prague out of its orbit and offer more legitimacy to non-communist forces.
In Lebanon, too, Hizbullah is being pressed by its external patrons, Iran and Syria, to overthrow a system they fear losing. Syria seeks to reimpose its hegemony over Lebanon, and its priority is to undermine the tribunal dealing with the Hariri assassination. Iran, for its part, doesn't like the fact that United Nations Security Council 1701 is stifling Hizbullah along the Israeli border. Hizbullah may not control security ministries as the communists did in Czechoslovakia, but it has influential allies in the military, and its militia is more powerful than the army. It may not fear losing elections, but its setbacks in the July-August war, particularly the destruction visited on Shiites, obliged it to mobilize its supporters against the government so they would not turn their anger against the party. Like the Czech communists, Hizbullah is using both institutions and the street to seize power. It has also succeeded, like the communists did with the socialists in Czechoslovakia, in neutralizing a key actor whose opposition could have decisively damaged their ambitions: the Aounist movement.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
12/07/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Radical Iran has already said it does not recognize any international borders between Iran, versus Lebanon abdor Jerusalem, which by definition must include Syria's borders wid same. IRAN-SYRIA = RUSSIA-CHINA > THE TRUE TEST OF THEIR ANTI-ISRAEL-USA COLLUSIONS + ALLIANCE COMRADE-HOOD IS AFTER ISRAEL-USA GOES DOWN FOR THE COUNT, UNTO DEFAET = DESTRUCTION.
#2
Hizbullah's strategy is now clear, its repercussions dangerous. The party is pushing Lebanon into a protracted vacuum, in which low-level violence and economic debilitation become the norm.
Sounds like the Palestinian strategy all over again. Works like a charm for them, so why not give it a try. Abject poverty makes people so much more maleable.
Hizbullah's reckoning is profoundly cynical. Its manipulation of the alleged Shiite ability to withstand more hardship than other Lebanese shows disdain for Shiite aspirations. The fact that everyone will lose out after an economic meltdown, which is coming, seems obvious. But that Hizbullah should take it as a sign of strength that Shiites would lose relatively less because of their poverty is abhorrent.
So long as these terrorist puppets refuse to recognize how their war lords sentence them to absolute grinding poverty, they deserve the malnutrition, economic stagnation, high infant mortality and every single other pestilence that rides along with such apocalyptic conditions.
There can be no pitying of such monumental hatred. War lords and puppets alike nurse it within their souls like some grand legacy confered by divine ordination. It cannot be abandoned lest they lose their single remaining heritage; Hatred of the Jews.
This is all that their history has handed down to them. No great reputation for art, industry, literature, science, philosophy or medicine. Merely an undying devotion to murder, mayhem, torture and blind hatred.
One can only wonder if these fools ever ask themselves what their lot will be once all this strife comes to an end (as if they ever want it to). What then will they have to show for so many decades of vitriol and bile? What new tools will they have developed for wresting an honest living from the soil and resources around them?
Do they honestly think that the skills of piracy, war, conspiracy and skullduggery will bring them forward into a new age of accomplishment and wealth?
Such constant focus upon hate, harm and holy war deserves only one reward. Death. Death of the Palestinian people, their culture, their heritage and any claim they once thought to make upon the land they currently inhabit. Their's are the wages of evil.
#3
You know - I think the same could be said of the Democratic Party and their 'victim' groups (blacks, Latinos, etc...) which they freely give entitlements to....
#7
USMC6743 - A local phenom (if you have a flexible imagination, lol) - it stands for the Army of Steves... we gots tons of 'em on the 'Burg, lol, so they've banded together and...
#8
Good point, .com. Fifty Hail Mary's, 200 push ups and a good ol' shattered glass milkshake for me!
Posted by: BA ||
12/07/2006 14:39 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Glass milkshake?
Not my style, man. You can't rub some dirt on it and walk it off, y'know? I prefer a broken arm - make that a compound fracture - and diving into a pool of isopropyl alcohol.
Steve coulda done that, shaken it off, poured himself a two-finger jolt, fired up a $100 cigar, and discussed chess with Faye Dunaway.
#10
Very true, .com! I wonder if there's a Steve McQueen facts website out theres somewhere.
Posted by: BA ||
12/07/2006 14:51 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Very true, .com! I wonder if there's a Steve McQueen facts website out theres somewhere.
Some facts I know to be true : McQueen was a skilled racer (car and motorbike), and a real sharpshooter (the stockless sawed-off Winchester was his own idea, historically appropriate too, and he was able to shoot it as accurately and rapidly as "Josh Randall", no stunt double here)... and a very intense and economical actor, able to convey emotions without overdoing it.
"The Getaway" is my favorite McQueen part, btw, hard to top (Peckinpah + Steve).
#12
The Cooler King in the Great Escape - Steve was the man.
I thought Clooney was funny in O Brother. His other stuff is just tiresome. I remember he was actually in "the peacemaker" - not a bad mindless action flick w/Nicole Kidman, but as the lady said - what a pansy.
#16
hell, she could think I was a shitty kisser (which I prolly am) and tell all her skank friends about it if she let me grab that thing. It would be worth it just on GP alone when my buddies and I were high-fiving over it later at the slop-chute.
Sen. James M. Inhofe, in one of his final actions as chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, yesterday held a hearing to investigate whether press accounts have "over-hyped" predictions of global warming. "The media often fails to distinguish between predictions and what is actually being observed on the Earth today," the Oklahoma Republican said. "Rather than focus on the hard science of global warming, the media has instead become advocates for hyping scientifically unfounded climate alarmism."
Mr. Inhofe will lose control of the environmental panel next month when Democrats assume the Senate majority, and Sen. Barbara Boxer of California will assume the gavel. She promises extensive hearings on global warming, and yesterday chastised Mr. Inhofe for scrutinizing global-warming coverage. "In a free society, in what is the greatest democracy in the world, I do not believe it is proper to put pressure on the media to please a particular Senate committee view, one way or the other," she said.
The two are polar opposites when it comes to climate change -- Mr. Inhofe has called global warming "the greatest hoax perpetrated on the American people," while Mrs. Boxer has advocated efforts to significantly reduce greenhouse gases.
Mr. Inhofe, vilified by environmental groups for his position, said yesterday he fears "poorly conceived policy decisions may result from the media's over-hyped reporting."
The hearing was an opportunity for Mr. Inhofe to strike back at his critics, citing "overwhelmingly one-sided" reports on CBS, ABC and CNN and by Time, the Associated Press and Reuters. He accused reporters, including former NBC anchor Tom Brokaw, of failing to interview climate-change skeptics, and of omitting scientific data that contradicts global-warming theories. He also said reporters are motivated by money, quoting a French geophysicist who says alarmism "has become a very lucrative business."
Dan Gainor, director of the Business and Media Institute, testified that 30 years ago reporters tried to convince the public "we would all freeze to death" in a predicted new ice age. "In more than 100 years, the major media have warned us of at least four separate climate cataclysms," he said, adding there is a "media obsession" with former Vice President Al Gore's documentary "An Inconvenient Truth."
Australian climate-change researcher Robert M. Carter said the press employs "Frisbee science" that is "invariably alarmist in nature."
Naomi Oreskes, a professor of science studies at the University of California at San Diego, told the panel yesterday that while scientists still argue over the details, "there is a consensus" the climate is changing.
David Deming, a geologist at the University of Oklahoma, disagreed. "There is no sound scientific basis for predicting future climate change with any degree of certainty," he said. "It would be foolish to establish national energy policy on the basis of misinformation and irrational hysteria."
Mrs. Boxer cited comments from oil and bank executives who say global warming is a real occurrence, and promised Congress can "do what it takes to change course and protect the future for our children and grandchildren."
#1
The two are polar opposites when it comes to climate change -- Mr. Inhofe has called global warming "the greatest hoax perpetrated on the American people," while Mrs. Boxer has advocated efforts to significantly reduce greenhouse gases.
Let me just say that one could believe global warming is the greatest hoax perpetrated on the American people and still advocate significantly reducing greenhouse gases.
#2
IMO a perfect analogy for those insistently clinging to idea that global warming is a human-induced phenomenon:
From a classic Peanuts strip (sorry, couldn't find the actual strip):
[Linus and Lucy walking down the sidewalk notice an object on the ground]
Lucy: Well, look here. A big yellow butterfly. It's unusual to see one of those at THIS time of year, unless of course, it flew up from Brazil. I'll bet that's it. They DO that sometimes, you know. They fly up from Brazil.
Linus: [Bending down for a closer look] That's no butterfly! That's a potato chip.
Lucy: Well, I'll be. I wonder how a potato chip got all the way up here from Brazil!
#4
Global Warming results from the relentless dumbing down of the American Electorate and the destruction of the American educational system by leftists who have turned into a feel-good indoctrination system, not unlike madrassas.
#7
Yeah, "global warming" my left foot. I'ma lookin' forward to our lovely low of 17 degrees tonight here in Atlanta, with a high of 40 tomorrow.
Posted by: BA ||
12/07/2006 21:42 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Still trying to get the Giant Sun to surrender to tiny Earth > you know, the reason why the Sun is the one and only decadent Elitist while Earth is not an elitist [wannabe].
Sixty five years ago today, the US naval base at Pearl Harbor was attacked. 2,388 US military personnel and civilians wre killed. This was President Franklin D. Roosevelt's response the next day (slightly EFL):
Yesterday, December 7, 1941 - a date which will live in infamy - the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.
The United States was at peace with that nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its Government and its Emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific. Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in Oahu, the Japanese Ambassador to the United States and his colleague delivered to the Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message. While this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or armed attack...
The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian Islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. Very many American lives have been lost...
Yesterday the Japanese Government also launched an attack against Malaya. Last night Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong. Last night Japanese forces attacked Guam. Last night Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands. Last night the Japanese attacked Wake Island. This morning the Japanese attacked Midway Island.
Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.
As Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense.
Always will we remember the character of the onslaught against us. No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.
I believe I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost but will make very certain that this form of treachery shall never endanger us again.
Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger.
With confidence in our armed forces - with the unbounded determination of our people - we will gain the inevitable triumph - so help us God.
I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December seventh, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Empire."
On September 11, 2001, Al-Queda operatives funded and trained by the governments of Afghanistan and Iraq highjacked four aircraft and attacked targets in New York City and Washington DC. 3,030 US military personnel and civilians were killed. This is part of Senator Arlen Specter's (R-PA) response on 5 Dec 2006:
"We have not been invaded..."
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
12/07/2006 08:37 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"We have not been invaded" > thats right, invaders will called [US-based]UNO PEACEKEEPING FORCES, maybe UNIFUS??? Why do you think the RINO CINO Lefties is going hell-bent for the Cantonization=Enclavization of Amerika, while simul also dropping their traditional LIBERALIST, ANARCHIST, + ALTERNATIST, etc agendas in favor of "CONSERVATIVISM" [Stalinism], As said years ago on the Net, during the Clinton 90's, the so-called MSM WILL BE CALLING AND LABELING AMERICA AS SOVEREIGN, INDEPENDNET, AND A GREAT NATION/POWER, and doing so while America is de facto governed = dominated by OWG + Russo-China. THE US-GLOBALIST MSM WILL BE WILFULLY CALLING AMERICA THE USSA ALL THE WHILE ITS ACTUALLY THE WEAK, ANTI-SOVEREIGN AMERIKAN SSR. Thus, INVADING-OCCUPIER COMMIE AIRBORNE, etal. = UNO PEACEKEEPERS. They abuse and rape women as the UNO Units did in Africa - no reason for war, no reason to shoot back at UNO forces trying to help the divided, sectarianized Amer people engaged in massive national strifes, BLAME THE ELEMENT NOT THE ORGANIZATION/INTENTIONS, correct???
Posted by: DanNY ||
12/07/2006 06:43 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Yes, but we should also remember that Franklin Roosevelt would launch an unauthorized, unprovoked, surprise attack against the North African territories of neutral Vichy France many months later. No state of war existed between the US and France. No congressional authorization had been approved. In the great schemes of things, probably a very good strategic move on several levels, however, do note well how that fact is buried deep by the Donks and most histories. Their patron saint of the 20th Century did a far more unconstitutional act than anything BushHitler [sarcasm] stands accused of.
(moonbats)I'd also note that Roosevelt waged war against the Iraqis German (Nazis) too, even though they NEVER had attacked us at home. Also, remember that Israel Hawaii was NOT a U.S. State at the time, and some would say the Japs never even attacked "America." Finally, don't they know that the Japanese (Shinto), the Germans (Nazis), and the Italians (Fascists) would NEVER conspire together because their religion gov'ts are sooooo different. (/moonbats).
Posted by: BA ||
12/07/2006 10:54 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Ahem.
Germany declared war on us (Dec 9, 1941). Anything we did to them after that was fair, and certainly not unprovoked.
They asked for it, they got it.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/07/2006 11:11 Comments ||
Top||
#4
How many times have Islamists declared war [jihad] on us to date? I've lost count...
Posted by: Fred ||
12/07/2006 11:45 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I was watching a Pearl Harbor documentary last weekend and some of the scholars were actually apologetic about the brutal response to Japans attack and invasion of U.S. territory. Highlights (sic) included the firebombing of Tokyo, lack of prisoners taken, attacks on Japanese shipping, and nukes dropped on Japan. No mention of Japans peaceful acquisition of the Philippines, Indochina, and Manchuria. Apparently Roosevelt should have continued shipping Japan war supplies while they attacked our allies and friends.
#6
re: #3, I know Doc. I was just "channeling" a moonbat's logicthinking spewing.
Posted by: BA ||
12/07/2006 14:06 Comments ||
Top||
#7
"Torah! Torah! Torah!"
*snark* That's the funniest line I've seen in a long time! I love it!
Posted by: Dar ||
12/07/2006 14:17 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Yes they do apologize CS after years anti-American indoctrination in universities and colleges. Somehow they always skip over the fact that not only was Hawaii a territory of the United States, so was the Philippines. They also bury the butchery committed by the Imperial Japanese Forces upon those people. Never hear about the body count in the Philippines and Manila. They also skip over the fact that the Japanese government directed their civilian population to commit suicide rather than be captured at Saipan and Okinawa.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
In the broad details, there are striking similarities between the communist takeover in Czechoslovakia in 1948 and what is occurring in Lebanon today; between the "coup of Prague" and the "coup of Beirut," which Hizbullah and its comrades are presently sweating to implement. 
